https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340215 The fly waste classification dispute turned on whether the goods fell under heading 5505.20 or heading 5601.30 of the Central Excise Tariff. The classification under heading 5505.20 was rejected because the fibre length, which was central to the dispute, was not credibly established and the department relied on an inadequate test report and an alternative classification without first discrediting the assessee's claimed heading. HSN explanatory notes and the record supported treatment of textile fibres not exceeding 5 mm as textile flock under heading 5601.30, so the re-classification was held erroneous. en-us Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Aug 2017 15:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340215 The fly waste classification dispute turned on whether the goods fell under heading 5505.20 or heading 5601.30 of the Central Excise Tariff. The classification under heading 5505.20 was rejected because the fibre length, which was central to the dispute, was not credibly established and the department relied on an inadequate test report and an alternative classification without first discrediting the assessee's claimed heading. HSN explanatory notes and the record supported treatment of textile fibres not exceeding 5 mm as textile flock under heading 5601.30, so the re-classification was held erroneous. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 06 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340215